1 / 15

Analysis of cosmic/self-triggerd data of station 5

Analysis of cosmic/self-triggerd data of station 5. Hideyuki Sakamoto MICE Tracker Phone Meeting 20 th April 2007. Contents. Dead channel study by LED calibration run Overview for the mapping problem. PE distribution at each view PE correlation plot between each view Summary Next step

aida
Télécharger la présentation

Analysis of cosmic/self-triggerd data of station 5

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Analysis of cosmic/self-triggerd data of station 5 Hideyuki Sakamoto MICE Tracker Phone Meeting 20th April 2007 MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  2. Contents • Dead channel study by LED calibration run • Overview for the mapping problem. • PE distribution at each view • PE correlation plot between each view • Summary • Next step • Caution: plot : MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  3. Dead channel study • LED calibration data: • http://mice.iit.edu/scratch/20070322/cass105_nombias_ledoff.2.root • Check the channel is alive or dead by eye. • Alive: can see peaks • Dead: cannot see peak or difficult to separate each peak. • Check almost of channel. • All channel for LHB • MCM#1-#2 for RHB MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  4. Sample: Alive and Dead channel Alive Dead • Common feature on dead channels: • Pedestal is large and 1 p.e. is much smaller and more p.e. cannot see peaks. MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  5. LHB MCM#1: #29-#32 MCM#2: #29-#32 MCM#3: #22,#27,#29-#32,#35,#37,#44 MCM#4: #29-#32 MCM#5: #29-#32 MCM#6: #29-#32 MCM#7: #29-#32 MCM#8: #29-#32 RHB MCM#1: #23-#64 MCM#2: #29,#33-#36 MCM#3: under checking MCM#4: under checking MCM#5: under checking MCM#6: under checking MCM#7: under checking MCM#8: under checking List of dead channels MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  6. PE correlation between each view TOP: Before modifying the code Bottom: After modifying the code Pe @W C A B D 0 Pe @X A: detected correctly B: did not hit for both C/D: one has hit another did not. C/D region is still too much… This did not solve the problem… MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  7. PE distribution at each view TOP: Before modifying the code Bottom: After modifying the code • Amount of pedestal • The plot is created using a hit of max. p.e. at each view. • Not summation of all fibers at each view. • So, if it is assumed that muon is surely passing through station, • Then, it corresponds to hit efficiency. • But for now, of course we cannot estimate it by using wrong mapping. MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  8. PE distribution at each view (cnt’d) The reason is very easy to understand. Please image that some event has 3hits at each views, A, B, C. If the mapping between views is wrong, then max. light yield channel is selected among the rest of pedestal. Correct mapping Wrong mapping X view – 98ch X view – 98ch A B C V view – 100ch V view – 100ch W view – 102ch X view – 90ch W view -103ch This is Pedestal MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  9. From the slide#3, we can see mapping error between views. Each view are (almost) separated by the D0 connector (#1-#8) So, the mistake between views corresponds to the mistake between MCMs. It suggests that mapping error is happened at the electrical part, Inside of AFE or outside of AFE. #1 Waveguide #1 #2 V view #3 Waveguide #2 #4 Waveguide #3 #5 X view #6 #7 Waveguide #4 #8 W view Waveguide #5 Mistake between view? Back plane side LHB RHB MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  10. Plotting Maximum light yield within all channels on the cassette. • Final? way for now to checking the signal is seeing the channel of maximum light yield in the cassette. Before selection by view. • If only the mapping is wrong within the MCM modules, then we can see the signal by this plot anyway. • Cannot separate by view, of course. Just watching signal itself. • For this plot, only one fiber of maximum among 3 hits at each view is selected. RHB 150 #5 #6 #8 #7 #4 #3 #2 #1 LHB, MCM#3 is selected. 160 200 LHB ADC MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  11. #1 Waveguide #1 #2 V view #3 Waveguide #2 #4 Waveguide #3 #5 X view #6 #7 Waveguide #4 #8 W view Waveguide #5 Before showing PE plot…This is one of the most strange plots In the rule of the readout scheme, MCM# is starting from left side from the front view. This means that MCM# on RHB should be #1, #2, #5,#6,#8. But the result shows the same as LHB. Back plane side MCM plot LHB MCM RHB Problem.. LHB RHB MCM MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  12. PE distribution LHB Pedestal ratio Saturated ratio Signal ratio RHB What is this? If 100% triggering efficiency is assumed, then hit efficiency is roughly estimated by 85% at RHB. I think small efficiency at RHB is due to timing setup, if RHB is correct within the MCMs. For LHB, there has still problem…. MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  13. Present status – in my mind • Mapping problem should have fixed. • Yesterday, Malcolm sent email back to Ken, which says that the setup for the external trigger was wrong on the RHB. • If it is correct, then strange phenomena shown at slide #8&#9 is due to this! • So, we can see correct-decoded data at the next. • Coming soon? MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  14. Summary • Mapping problem should have been fixed and waiting for new samples. MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

  15. Next step • Check light yield and fiber crossing. • We can check the all fiber’s output. • Timing problem is also argued after mapping is fixed. MICE Tracker Phone Meeting

More Related